The Universalist. [volume] (Chicago [Ill.]) 1884-1897, 1887-05-21

ing men Of Gods loving purpose and his
moral providence, was not because he
failed to grasp all the logic of his own
theology, or from any limitation of view,
but because he realized more deeply than
most men, the great scope of the truth,
and all the spiritual consequences it in
volved. He was man of broad mental
range. And, although his mind was not
cast in the mould which fitted it for orig
NAL researcher for prolonged logical pro-
cesses, he had what was quite as useful
and quite as trustworthy. He had, what
for lack of better name I call an instinct
for spiritual truth. He could follow
even when he could not lead, and was
prompt to perceive relations and se-
quences of thought which he might not
have been able to demonstrate or to es-
tablish. And he was exceedingly quick
and clear in perceiving the moral side of
all truth. So that he was less timid
than most men when fresh light vas pro-
claimed in religion. And his mind grasp.
breadth and the height and the depth of
the Universalist idea. He perceived it's
immense resources. He realized what
grounds it had in Gods nature. He saw
how 1t could threaten as we'll as persuade.
He felt the blessing that lurked at the
bottom of chastisement, and the crown
OF bliss that is the end of the toll and euf.
feIing of retribution. And his strenuous
and enthusiastic faith used sometimes
to startle my conscious and hating
mind. But there came a day when /
realized that my father had as wary and
sensitive mind; thought as open to all
the pros and cons of evidence and of moral
consequences as his son, but that he had
something else, tc wit, the large insight of
a simple and sincere mind which directed
him straight to the truth, undazzled by
the play of controversy, or by the shift
ing mirage of mems uncertain specula-
tions. He knew what men were saying,
and what they we're thinking. And while
he listened, his thought was weighing
the evidence, and moving straight ON to
the heart OF truth. And I say unhesitat-
ingly, that the reason why he was such
an uncompromising believer, was because
be had such comprehensive grasp of
the resources of the faith, "she depth of
riches, both of the wisdom and know
ledge of God"
There was another reason for it. My
father was man to whom truth, however
it.efpoe tQ him, always yielded aspiritua)
meaning. He always saw it in its rela-
tons to the affections, the moral sense,
the will of man. He was personally a
spiritually minded man, and he always
looked for the spiritual application of the
truth. All religion was to him something
to be made practical and operative in
the life. He had no conception of re.
ligion which should not be experimental.
And his constant search for the link
which should bind theory to practice, and
join doctrine to its proper manifesto
ton in character, led him to see farther
than many, the ethical power of the gos-
pei, as interpreted by Universalism and to
understand the loftiness of the truths it
presents, the force of its deterrents and
the significance of its promises. He was
such an implicit believer, largely because
he had, in such ample measure, the wit
ness within.
But with all this intensity of belief, he
was one of the most tolerant men I
ever knew. He loved the truth, and he
could not always see why it should not
be as clear to others as to himself. And
yet he was always ready to accord the
same liberty of thought he claimed for
himself. He never wanted to stihe ut
terance or check Investigation. He was
as anxious that other men should be
true to their convictions as he was to be
true to himself. And he was so con-
fident that the truth would not suffer,
that he was willing that even its enemies
should have their chance to be heard and
to argue their case. Phillips Brooks has
just published two lectures upon "Tol-
erance" whose last thought seems to me
to give a true account of the tolerance
have studied and admired in l1y father.
And his argument starts from the words
he quotes from Frederick Maurice: "It is
the natural feeling of us all that charity
is founded upon the uncertainty of truth.
1 believe it is founded ON the certainty of
truth" And it goes on to maintain that
tolerance is the blending of positive con-
viction with sympathy, with men whose
convictions differ from our own. L am sure
that this was characteristic of my father.
His was not the tolerance of indiffer-
ence. 1t did not'spring from skepticism.
1t was the deep and tender sympathy of an
earnest nature, diligently seeking Gods
truth, and convinced of having found some
of it, but so conscious of what other men
were doing for the same great end, that it
would insist on giving them their footing and
standing ground, too. His catholicity of
spirit was unbounded. No matter how far
apart he might be from a man in theology or
in philosophy, he could always find some
thing in common with them spiritually. Few
men ever had warmer relations of fellowship
and spiritual sympathy. He could find some
thing in common with the radical on the one
hand, and with the staunchest Calyinist on the
other. Whoever was seeking God, whoever
was striving after holiness, had his broadest
sympathy. He would insist ON finding some
common ground with every real seeker after
Cod Tho oulv raopfa ha aonld uof fOlarafa